Lawmakers seek to boost affordable housing laws

SACRAMENTO  California lawmakers have moved to to reverse a court ruling that they believe has crippled the ability of cities and counties to force developers to set aside affordable housing units or pay a fee, particularly in high-cost regions like coastal San Diego.

The push is being led by San Diego Assemblywoman Toni Atkins, who crafted legislation clarifying the authority of cities and counties to impose ordinances designed to help house those with modest paychecks.

These “inclusionary housing” laws, adopted by some 140 cities and counties, require developers to either set aside a certain percentage of units or contribute money into a general pot that is then used to subsidize home as part of a new project.

“My bill gives local governments a green light to continue using this tool without fear of conflicting with state law,” said Atkins, a Democrat.

The measure is on its way to Gov. Jerry Brown’s desk after passing both the Senate and Assembly without a vote to spare.

Builders, Realtors and apartment associations have been fighting the legislation, arguing that it would grant local governments rent control authority over new development, not just existing units. Others say complying with inclusionary housing is costly and an unfair intrusion in the free market.

The San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce has come out in opposition, saying in a letter that it would “hurt the state’s housing recovery and its economy.”

“The high demand and low inventory of available housing also attribute to the high housing costs in the state,” continued the letter signed by its president, Jerry Sanders, the former mayor. “The governor and Legislature should focus on policies that incentivize or lower housing construction costs rather than discourage or increase it.”

The Legislature granted local governments the power to adopt inclusionary housing ordinances more than 40 years ago. As a result, tens of thousands of families have been able to find a more reasonably priced place to live, supporters argue.

But in 2009 a California appellate court tossed out an inclusionary housing ordinance adopted by the city of Los Angeles because it conflicted with a 1995 state law that set the rules for local rent control. But it left untouched the inclusionary housing policies governing for-sale housing.

As a result, a number of the 140 cities and counties using inclusionary housing ordinances were sent scrambling. Some opted to charge fees, or limit the reach of their housing requirements. But others simply abandoned their affordable housing rules.

Atkins said her bill returns to the status quo so local governments can adopt ordinances covering both rental and for-sale housing.

“You just don’t want to deal with that legal liability,” said Atkins, who as a councilwoman wrote the city’s initial ordinance.

The city of San Diego in 2011 overhauled its policies in the wake of the court ruling. The city’s current ordinance requires developers of homes for sale to set aside 10 percent of their units or pay a fee. The set aside for condominium conversions is 5 percent.